A good sitting posture

[faa2010]

When I try to sit up straight when I am playing, my back pains, specially when I keep the straight posture for a long time.

Is very important to sit up straight while playing the piano?, what can I do so my back won't get in pain?

[m1469]

My idea of the best possible posture is one where I am ready to tango with the devil ...   .  Okay, but for those of whom that makes no sense, it's not about stasis in one position, nor is it 'about' motion (especially purposeless motion).  It's about balance and centeredness, and being capable of getting where you need to get without losing balance and focus - even if our body moves.  Our body is built with the ability to be balanced and centered, even in motion!  Beyond that, I don't feel I could explain at the moment as I have to go tango ...

[ionian_tinnear]

It's about balance and centeredness

Exactly true I think.  If I sit too far back, and sit up, my back gets tired.  Same if I sit too far forward.  Balance is the key.  In the theatre, where I play too much, it gets very crowded which often makes it a challenge to get a good spacing between bench and keyboard.

Odd as it sounds, I've actually used an 8 inch wide board sat across my speakers for a bench!  Worked quite well.

Point of that is, Piano benches are wider than they need to be.  Maybe adjusting your position on the bench, probably moving forward so your legs are free would help.  For me, that 8 inches is all I use of the bench.  Best to find what works for you.

[ryan2189]

I've always found that sitting your butt on the near end of the bench nearest the keyboard is appropriate. Your legs should only be slightly underneath the keyboard. With this distance and sitting position you should try to naturally fall into a comfortable back position. You don't need to be rigid as a board, in fact a slight curve is probably the most relaxed.

It's true that you don't need the whole bench, not do I think you should use all of it. When you're sitting on the edge, you have more of a pivot point to transfer all of your body weight into your arms (and consequently into your playing).

[nystul]

Sometimes when people try to "sit up straight", they fix the wrong thing so to speak.  I have a picture of myself in college carrying a bass drum, and I can see looking at it how I was trying to correct my posture up high when the problem was down low.  No wonder my balance has always been so poor.

Also posture is a cumulative thing which affects your muscles and eventually your bone structure.  If you consciously sit up straight when playing music but spend the rest of the day slouching, I'm not sure that's going to work out.  Kids don't seem to get sore no matter what so they can get away with all sorts of things, but it catches up to you when you get older.

[nyiregyhazi]

Sometimes when people try to "sit up straight", they fix the wrong thing so to speak.  I have a picture of myself in college carrying a bass drum, and I can see looking at it how I was trying to correct my posture up high when the problem was down low.  No wonder my balance has always been so poor.

Also posture is a cumulative thing which affects your muscles and eventually your bone structure.  If you consciously sit up straight when playing music but spend the rest of the day slouching, I'm not sure that's going to work out.  Kids don't seem to get sore no matter what so they can get away with all sorts of things, but it catches up to you when you get older.

After you're already straight, you need to start releasing things. The problem is when you carry on forcing yourself upright. You've already done that. Now it's time to start feeling which efforts are not longer needed and seeing what you can release while maintaining balance. It's good to go back and forth. Release to the point of letting things go down a little, but notice when you get to the point where you'll start falling backwards/forward or where your spine will start bending. Then pull yourself straighter again. Go back and forth very slowly. See if you can get to the point where you're releasing most of the efforts but not causing imbalance. Instead of continually forcing yourself up against gravity, you need to find the point where you are merely balancing it. It's neither about forcing all the way up, or allowing excessive droop back down.

[pianoman53]

Don't try to sit completely straight all the time. If you're not completely relaxed (and trust me, you're not) you will get this sort of static energy, which is the same as if you're doing sit-ups, but stops right in the middle. When you know to look out for it, you'll notice that no one sits completely still while playing. It might be doing crazy movements like lang lang, or really really minor motions like Hamelin or Libetta, but they all move. Try to find a spot (like nyiregyhazi; going back and forth until you get it), then you move around a little bit.

Hope it helps.

[keypeg]

There is a huge issue with what has been taught as "posture" and it has messed up a lot of us.  People are starting to wake up to it - things are popping up all over the place: piano, any musical instrument, yoga, and even trainers who have hulks doing chin-ups.  The stuff that messed us up is still being taught.  

Two ideas - If you can afford it, find a good Alexander Technique instructor.  (I couldn't, so I haven't.)  Another is the book "What Every Pianist Should Know About the Human Body" by Thomas Mark.  A third: if you can get a hold of a good teacher who is body-aware, technique-aware, and can observe you with open eyes and without memorized rules of "good posture".

I got the book after having already worked out a few things, and everything there seems true.  He tells you how your body really works and has you explore.  The book does not work if you only read it, or if you select bits and pieces here and there that you think might suit you.  It's something to work through section by section.  You'll probably discover that half the battles you have are caused by misperceptions about the body, and that many of those stem from what you have been taught about posture in the first place.

There is also Mary Bond, and then there is an odd seeming character who actually makes tons of sense who has a site called "The Smiling Back".  He got into Alexander when he was a piano student and now he teaches it.

Personally, I am working with a teacher who does not follow any "posture rules" but is able to observe what looks effective and what doesn't.  So far everything he has said has gone hand in hand with the book by Mark - I draw on what I learned there to help me reach some of what my teacher says, and in turn, my teacher gives feedback on what he sees and hears from me.  I give my teacher feedback on whether I feel comfortable for what he suggests.  So far this is working.

[brettgeorge]

Definitely these tips going to help a beginner just like me....
So in short summary the main two dimensions to be checked while sitting in front of piano are the "height" the player sitting on and the "distance" between piano and the player sitting in-front of it! Looking forward for more.....

[gsmile]

See this article: Posture for Instantly Improved Sound. It talks about the bench and your body and gives you little tips for finding the best position for yourself quickly.

[nyiregyhazi]

See this article: Posture for Instantly Improved Sound. It talks about the bench and your body and gives you little tips for finding the best position for yourself quickly.

I found this troubling, to put it mildly:

"For example, in the introduction for Beethoven’s Pathétique (1st Movement), the dramatic C minor chords are just a drop of the arms, with stiff wrists after the drop, so the sound does not fade, to emphasize the drama."

[gsmile]

I found this troubling, to put it mildly:

"For example, in the introduction for Beethoven’s Pathétique (1st Movement), the dramatic C minor chords are just a drop of the arms, with stiff wrists after the drop, so the sound does not fade, to emphasize the drama."

I don't see what you're getting at-- it's telling people that there are exceptions to the stiff wrist rule. I am a performer and I can vouch for that phrase. You can't use the pedal to hold the notes or else they'll blur-- you'll have to keep your wrists stiff for clear sound.

You can send a post in too and they'll publish it if they like it. It's a large, long-term project in the early stages and I know a few very talented individuals involved.

[keypeg]

nm

[brettgeorge]

See this article: Posture for Instantly Improved Sound. It talks about the bench and your body and gives you little tips for finding the best position for yourself quickly.

It seems going to learn plenty of things from this forum... 

[nyiregyhazi]

I don't see what you're getting at-- it's telling people that there are exceptions to the stiff wrist rule. I am a performer and I can vouch for that phrase. You can't use the pedal to hold the notes or else they'll blur-- you'll have to keep your wrists stiff for clear sound.

You can send a post in too and they'll publish it if they like it. It's a large, long-term project in the early stages and I know a few very talented individuals involved.

Firstly, there are very few pianists who use a "drop" for that chord. It tends to produce a rather harsh and banged sound, compared to starting from contact. Why on earth could you not use the pedal to hold a single sustained chord without blurring? I'm bemused. And how on earth would the wrists being "stiff" have any effect on a pedalling issue? There are far more possibilites than flopping your wrist and intending for it to be "stiff". Are you suggesting that the only way to keep notes of the chord from rising back up is to be stiff? You don't need an ounce of stiffness to keep balance and I've never heard a single person claim that you have to have a "stiff wrist" for a clear sound.

Referring to a stiff wrist is extremely reckless use of language that could easily convey something that would be very dangerous to many. With virtually every student I've had attempt this piece, stiffness in the wrist is more than enough of a problem to start with- even without active encouragement of it.

[nyiregyhazi]

Also, what on earth is this supposed to mean?
"
Adjust your bench until it is comfortable, as long as your body is one armlength away from the piano."

What is an armlength? Presumably not a fully outstretched arm- which means that this tells us literally nothing about how the arm is actually supposed to be aligned (except that you are supposed to be able to reach the keys- what an insight!).

This is also utter nonsense:

"When you’re sitting on the bench, your feet should touch the ground. If not, place a stool or phonebook under your feet so that your legs form a 90 degree angle with the ground. If you have a keyboard (without a bench) find a chair that’s the right height for you."

For those with long arms it could mean being totally cramped up against the piano. The exact angle of the legs will vary considerably based on individual proportions. If used as the point of judgement, it could greatly conflict with the ease of aligning the arm. This article is utter bilge. In fact, forget long arms. The only way to play with a 90 degree angle is to never to use the pedal, or sit so close that the knee is directly above it. Sorry to be blunt, but this is total crap. For a young child, it will be necessary to sit relatively close for the arms to reach the keys , which might happen to produce something close to a 90 degree angle. However, no grown adult who uses a pedal can ever produce such an angle without limiting the movement of their arms. Why would this exact angle be a goal? It's pure coincidence that some postures might happen to lead to it. Having the feet at least slightly forward of the knees is a necessity for virtually everyone- and also spreads the weight far more comfortably.

Also, in spite of being pointlessly specific and restrictive about the angle between the legs and the ground you didn't define any means of determining the "right height". If this is supposed to help people (rather than mislead them) it needs a great deal more thought put into it.

[keypeg]

The things in the Gsmile's link are things that we still see commonly taught - they were taught a lot maybe 10 or more years ago and then before.  More and more there are people coming out who are pointing out the damage that has happened from some of this, and giving different approaches that help with sitting & moving at the piano, and also to fix that damage.

"Sit up straight" already causes a problem.  One person wrote "Poor posture is bad.  But 'good posture' gotten in the wrong way is much worse."  We do awful and unnatural things to ourselves when we try to sit up straight.  We lock ourselves into place, we tire ourselves using the wrong muscles.  To learn balanced sitting that allows us to move naturally is different.  I'd think that getting an observant teacher (not a rigid one with rigid rules) is very helpful.

"Shoulders back" is really dastardly!  It's supposed to help with slouching, without getting at the cause of slouching or what slouching is.  Our "shoulders" are part of our arm movement.  I'm in the middle of undoing the mess from that advice.

"Head back" - I assume to stop the "head forward posture" - very easy to then get a "back oriented posture".  The head is the top end of the spine which wants to be able to move subtly and fluidly.  If you keep your head fixed, nothing else can move easily either.

[gsmile]

Firstly, there are very few pianists who use a "drop" for that chord. It tends to produce a rather harsh and banged sound, compared to starting from contact. Why on earth could you not use the pedal to hold a single sustained chord without blurring? I'm bemused. And how on earth would the wrists being "stiff" have any effect on a pedalling issue?

If you listen to the piece, those are definitely not just single sustained chords-- there is a long, loud chord (which you do pedal on) then there are shorter, softer chords which you do not pedal on because there are 32nd notes.
It really is up to you how you interpret the piece, but if you go to university for music, you probably won't pedal throughout Bach's pieces and you probably won't pedal throughout 32nd notes when they're repeated and they're solid chords-- because most likely, they'll blur.

[gsmile]

Also, what on earth is this supposed to mean?
"
Adjust your bench until it is comfortable, as long as your body is one armlength away from the piano."

What is an armlength? Presumably not a fully outstretched arm- which means that this tells us literally nothing about how the arm is actually supposed to be aligned (except that you are supposed to be able to reach the keys- what an insight!).

This is also utter nonsense:

"When you’re sitting on the bench, your feet should touch the ground. If not, place a stool or phonebook under your feet so that your legs form a 90 degree angle with the ground. If you have a keyboard (without a bench) find a chair that’s the right height for you."

For those with long arms it could mean being totally cramped up against the piano. The exact angle of the legs will vary considerably based on individual proportions. If used as the point of judgement, it could greatly conflict with the ease of aligning the arm. This article is utter bilge. In fact, forget long arms. The only way to play with a 90 degree angle is to never to use the pedal, or sit so close that the knee is directly above it. Sorry to be blunt, but this is total crap. For a young child, it will be necessary to sit relatively close for the arms to reach the keys , which might happen to produce something close to a 90 degree angle. However, no grown adult who uses a pedal can ever produce such an angle without limiting the movement of their arms. Why would this exact angle be a goal? It's pure coincidence that some postures might happen to lead to it. Having the feet at least slightly forward of the knees is a necessity for virtually everyone- and also spreads the weight far more comfortably.

Also, in spite of being pointlessly specific and restrictive about the angle between the legs and the ground you didn't define any means of determining the "right height". If this is supposed to help people (rather than mislead them) it needs a great deal more thought put into it.

It tells you that you stretch out your fist and touch it against the piano. How can you be cramped when you have long arms? And what are you talking about? I think the 90 degree angle thing is a guideline-- and it tells beginners not to cross their legs. It doesn't say at any point, nor is it implied, that you are not allowed to leave the 90 degree angle with your legs.

[nyiregyhazi]

"If you listen to the piece, those are definitely not just single sustained chords-- there is a long, loud chord (which you do pedal on) then there are shorter, softer chords which you do not pedal on because there are 32nd notes."

Actually, I use extremely quick changes on every individual chrod, which makes for the possibility of full legato without blurring. This is far from an unusual approach. And what has any of this got to do with demanding a stiff wrist?


"It really is up to you how you interpret the piece, but if you go to university for music, you probably won't pedal throughout Bach's pieces and you probably won't pedal throughout 32nd notes when they're repeated and they're solid chords-- because most likely, they'll blur."

I've been to both university and music college. I think you're underestimating how quickly a dab of pedal can be applied, when timed well.

[gsmile]

The things in the Gsmile's link are things that we still see commonly taught - they were taught a lot maybe 10 or more years ago and then before.  More and more there are people coming out who are pointing out the damage that has happened from some of this, and giving different approaches that help with sitting & moving at the piano, and also to fix that damage.

"Sit up straight" already causes a problem.  One person wrote "Poor posture is bad.  But 'good posture' gotten in the wrong way is much worse."  We do awful and unnatural things to ourselves when we try to sit up straight.  We lock ourselves into place, we tire ourselves using the wrong muscles.  To learn balanced sitting that allows us to move naturally is different.  I'd think that getting an observant teacher (not a rigid one with rigid rules) is very helpful.

"Shoulders back" is really dastardly!  It's supposed to help with slouching, without getting at the cause of slouching or what slouching is.  Our "shoulders" are part of our arm movement.  I'm in the middle of undoing the mess from that advice.

"Head back" - I assume to stop the "head forward posture" - very easy to then get a "back oriented posture".  The head is the top end of the spine which wants to be able to move subtly and fluidly.  If you keep your head fixed, nothing else can move easily either.

Maybe either one of us is misunderstanding the article. My understanding of it is different from yours, obviously.

It doesn't say that you should be stiff-- in fact, it says release all tension. There are tips to help you improve your posture because if you sit that way too long (be it slouched or with one leg crossed) your body will continue grow that way. If you want to have your shoulder blades unbalanced or unnaturally bent forward, or your neck's muscles damaged, then you should just sit however.

You should keep nothing fixed-- hence "release all tension and relax". It guides you to your right posture without allowing you to develop any structural deformation.

In ballet, yoga, and many other forms of dance, "good posture" is defined as having the head up, the back straight, and the shoulders relaxed. To relax your upper back and shoulders, just roll your shoulders in a circle, stopping when your shoulders are in the downwards position. That's what the article is telling you, without going into it too much. This is web copy and reading on a screen is fatiguing so less is more.

[nyiregyhazi]

"It tells you that you stretch out your fist and touch it against the piano."

When your arm is entirely outstretched (ie straight from shoulder to hand), you should only just be able to touch the piano? Or when your arm is still bent? I have no idea what you are trying to convey. If it's the former, that leaves me reaching far too much to get between the black keys. I have never seen a pianist in my life, who would be at full reach. If it's the latter, it conveys nothing even faintly specific. There is a massive range of positions where I can touch the piano with my fist. It's as good saying "make sure you can reach the keys".



"How can you be cramped when you have long arms? And what are you talking about? I think the 90 degree angle thing is a guideline-- and it tells beginners not to cross their legs?"

So why not say "don't cross your legs"- rather than give them a nonsensically precise figure about a position that almost nobody would ever use? If my legs were at 90 degrees to the floor my knee would be straight above the pedals and my arms would be cramped. I'd have to force the stool in all the way. So why specify this? Why even put the idea in a person's head? Even though you don't specify that this is desirable for those who can reach the floor, anyone could easily take it as suggesting it to be a desirable posture. However, it is not desirable in any way. The weight is balanced far better if the feet are forward of the knee- and just about any pianist will need such a position to be able to pedal.

[gsmile]

"It tells you that you stretch out your fist and touch it against the piano."

When your arm is entirely outstretched (ie straight from shoulder to hand), you should only just be able to touch the piano? Or when your arm is still bent? I have no idea what you are trying to convey. If it's the former, that leaves me reaching far too much to get between the black keys. I have never seen a pianist in my life, who would be at full reach. If it's the latter, it conveys nothing even faintly specific. There is a massive range of positions where I can touch the piano with my fist. It's as good saying "make sure you can reach the keys".



"How can you be cramped when you have long arms? And what are you talking about? I think the 90 degree angle thing is a guideline-- and it tells beginners not to cross their legs?"

So why not say "don't cross your legs"- rather than give them a nonsensically precise figure about a position that almost nobody would ever use? If my legs were at 90 degrees to the floor my knee would be straight above the pedals and my arms would be cramped. I'd have to force the stool in all the way. So why specify this? Why even put the idea in a person's head? Even though you don't specify that this is desirable for those who can reach the floor, anyone could easily take it as suggesting it to be a desirable posture. However, it is not desirable in any way. The weight is balanced far better if the feet are forward of the knee- and just about any pianist will need such a position to be able to pedal.

Making a fist, your knuckles and flats of fingers should be able to touch the piano.

 

• Make a fist in one hand and stretch it out in front of you until it touches the board directly above the keys (or where the board would be, for a electric piano).
• Make sure your back is straight and your shoulders are relaxed. Have control, not tension.
• Adjust your bench until it is comfortable, as long as your body is one armlength away from the piano. This trick also makes sure that your feet aren’t too far away from the pedals when you need them.

Posture for Instantly Improved Sound

Obviously, you don't play this way-- you find your distance, then you take your arm down.

It doesn't say "don't cross your legs" probably because there are lots of other ways that students place their feet (that I've seen, e.g. on the bench, straight out, one leg bent to the side, etc.) and the most specific and concise way to convey that is at an approx 90 degree angle. When you start there, then your legs would be able to reach the pedals, moving away from the 90 degree angle.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Making a fist, your knuckles and flats of fingers should be able to touch the piano."
 
Obviously, you don't play this way-- you find your distance, then you take your arm down."

? That doesn't tell me anything. I do can this from a whole range of stool positions- many of which are totally unsuitable for playing. In particular, if my arm were fully outstretched when judging this way, I would from then on be making a very big effort to get between the black keys. As I asked in my last post- is the arm supposed to be fully outstretched and straightened when doing this or slightly bent? You didn't make it clear.


"It doesn't say "don't cross your legs" probably because there are lots of other ways that students place their feet (that I've seen, e.g. on the bench, straight out, one leg bent to the side, etc.) and the most specific and concise way to convey that is at an approx 90 degree angle. When you start there, then your legs would be able to reach the pedals, moving away from the 90 degree angle."

Even without pedalling, it spreads the weight poorly if the leg goes straight down. As someone who is tall and sits low, it's essential to have my feet forward of the knees. 90 degrees isn't even terribly good as a point of departure.

[gsmile]

"Making a fist, your knuckles and flats of fingers should be able to touch the piano."
 
Obviously, you don't play this way-- you find your distance, then you take your arm down."

? That doesn't tell me anything. I do can this from a whole range of stool positions- many of which are totally unsuitable for playing. In particular, if my arm were fully outstretched, I would be making a very big effort to get between the black keys. As I asked in my last post- is the arm supposed to be fully outstretched or slightly bent? You didn't make it clear.


"It doesn't say "don't cross your legs" probably because there are lots of other ways that students place their feet (that I've seen, e.g. on the bench, straight out, one leg bent to the side, etc.) and the most specific and concise way to convey that is at an approx 90 degree angle. When you start there, then your legs would be able to reach the pedals, moving away from the 90 degree angle."

Even without pedalling, it spreads the weight poorly if the leg goes straight down. As someone who is tall and sits low, it's essential to have my feet forward of the knees. 90 degrees isn't even terribly good as a point of departure.

Arm straight right in front of you with a fist, the flats of your fingers touching the piano. It tells you your approx distance. How would it be difficult for you? After you find your distance, you take your arm down and just play. That's your personal distance, with the length of your arm, not anyone else's distance. It gives you a greater range of motion according to the length of your arms.

As someone who is tall and sits low, your knees probably won't be above your hips-- that's also what the 90 degree angle guideline says. (Be nice to your knees.) Of course you need to reach your feet forward to reach the pedals, hence "release all tension" and don't keep anything stiff.

[nyiregyhazi]

"Arm straight right in front of you with a fist, the flats of your fingers touching the piano. It tells you your approx distance. How would it be difficult for you?"

It's way too far to reach! Horowitz sits a long way from the piano, but not even close to as far as this puts me! I'm sorry, but this is a poor means of judging. It may coincidentally lead to something that works for some, but there's nothing inherently natural or logical about your means of judging. I regularly play between the black keys (sometimes right at the very back) as just about all good pianists do. If I sat as your yardstick suggests, I'd either have to lean my torso a very long way forward, or I'd have to do so with an almost perfectly straight arm.

Come to think of it, seeing as it's based upon the arm being perfectly straight  at a point which is scarcely beyond the key at all, I struggle to see how this could work for anyone (other than beginners who only use white keys). How many pianists have to fully outstretch their arms to get between black keys? You should not be have to be anywhere near a fully outstretched arm to access the full range of each key. If there are pianists who do play this way, it's a very unusual choice of posture. This seems geared towards playing that is done right at the front of each key. Pianists need equally comfortable access to the backs of the keys.

"As someone who is tall and sits low, your knees probably won't be above your hips-- that's also what the 90 degree angle guideline says."

? 90 degrees between the calves and floor has no bearing on whether the knees are above or below the hips. That's about the angle of the thigh.

[gsmile]

"Arm straight right in front of you with a fist, the flats of your fingers touching the piano. It tells you your approx distance. How would it be difficult for you?"

It's way too far to reach! Horowitz sits a long way from the piano, but not even close to as far as this puts me! I'm sorry, but this is a poor means of judging. It may coincidentally lead to something that works for some, but there's nothing inherently natural or logical about your means of judging. I regularly play between the black keys (sometimes right at the very back) as just about all good pianists do. If I sat as your yardstick suggests, I'd either have to lean my torso a very long way forward, or I'd have to do so with an almost perfectly straight arm.

Come to think of it, seeing as it's based upon the arm being perfectly straight  at a point which is scarcely beyond the key at all, I struggle to see how this could work for anyone (other than beginners who only use white keys). How many pianists have to fully outstretch their arms to get between black keys? You should not be have to be anywhere near a fully outstretched arm to access the full range of each key. If there are pianists who do play this way, it's a very unusual choice of posture. This seems geared towards playing that is done right at the front of each key. Pianists need equally comfortable access to the backs of the keys.

"As someone who is tall and sits low, your knees probably won't be above your hips-- that's also what the 90 degree angle guideline says."

? 90 degrees between the calves and floor has no bearing on whether the knees are above or below the hips. That's about the angle of the thigh.

You arm has to be straight as in right in front of your shoulder to find your distance. Then you take your arm down and play.
There would be too much pressure on your knees if they were above your hips, so there really is no "sitting low" unless your knees are above your hips.

[nyiregyhazi]

"You arm has to be straight as in right in front of your shoulder to find your distance. Then you take your arm down and play."

Okay, that makes more sense. I'd really clarify that the arm is supposed to be a parallel to the floor though in your explanation. This sentence is highly open to misunderstanding:


"Make a fist in one hand and stretch it out in front of you until it touches the board directly above the keys (or where the board would be, for a electric piano)."

"Directly above the keys" strongly suggests a very small distance above the keys. Also, (while I have an upright myself) this would also be in thin air on a grand piano. The fact you didn't mention that and the phrase "directly" above is extremely open to misunderstanding.


"There would be too much pressure on your knees if they were above your hips, so there really is no "sitting low" unless your knees are above your hips."

There are some people who sit this way- although I certainly wouldn't recommend it personally. I seem to recall that Rachmaninoff had to sit this way.

[keypeg]

In ballet, yoga, and many other forms of dance, "good posture" is defined as having the head up, the back straight, and the shoulders relaxed. To relax your upper back and shoulders, just roll your shoulders in a circle, stopping when your shoulders are in the downwards position. That's what the article is telling you, without going into it too much. This is web copy and reading on a screen is fatiguing so less is more.

You will find a growing number of professionals in the fields of yoga, various musical instruments, sports and fitness, and even simple posture and rehabilitation experts - they are all saying roughly the same thing.  What was taught in regards to posture ended up creating problems, and it is in those precise areas.   They are busy undoing the damage and reteaching it. There is a lot more to it.  I am familiar with those principles.

[gsmile]

"You arm has to be straight as in right in front of your shoulder to find your distance. Then you take your arm down and play."

Okay, that makes more sense. I'd really clarify that the arm is supposed to be a parallel to the floor though in your explanation. This sentence is highly open to misunderstanding:


"Make a fist in one hand and stretch it out in front of you until it touches the board directly above the keys (or where the board would be, for a electric piano)."

"Directly above the keys" strongly suggests a very small distance above the keys. Also, (while I have an upright myself) this would also be in thin air on a grand piano. The fact you didn't mention that and the phrase "directly" above is extremely open to misunderstanding.


"There would be too much pressure on your knees if they were above your hips, so there really is no "sitting low" unless your knees are above your hips."

There are some people who sit this way- although I certainly wouldn't recommend it personally. I seem to recall that Rachmaninoff had to sit this way.

Yeah, that's true. I realized that the sentence is really open to interpretation if you didn't already know the principle. I sent them an email just to let them know.

Do you teach full time, nyiregyhazi?

You will find a growing number of professionals in the fields of yoga, various musical instruments, sports and fitness, and even simple posture and rehabilitation experts - they are all saying roughly the same thing.  What was taught in regards to posture ended up creating problems, and it is in those precise areas.   They are busy undoing the damage and reteaching it. There is a lot more to it.  I am familiar with those principles.

While it's true in ballet for pointe-- that your feet can be deformed, in most of the other fields, posture helps you protect your joints and bones. There are reasons that the postures have been developed, e.g. you should always do sit ups with bent knees to protect your lower back and spinal chord (this old rule is tried and true).

[keypeg]

Yes, but how posture was taught has caused problems.  I am talking specifically about the main principles that were taught until recently and still are .... not about things specific to things like ballet.  In my earlier post I referred to a few resources.  Please do feel free to explore them, especially the first - it does make a difference.

[gsmile]

Yes, but how posture was taught has caused problems.  I am talking specifically about the main principles that were taught until recently and still are .... not about things specific to things like ballet.  In my earlier post I referred to a few resources.  Please do feel free to explore them, especially the first - it does make a difference.

Thanks for sharing. Forcing yourself to achieve a certain posture isn't the way, but having a somewhat "standard" posture will be easier on the bones/joints and on the eyes!

[jaggens]

It is often told that the body should be like this or that while playing the piano.
My opinion is to find the most natural position where all the body parts work confluently.

If some kind of posture (it can be straight) is forced, it will couse internal tensions that start to tire muscules and create inside conflicts.

So backbone - here the most important word is balance. Every segment of the bacbone rests on the lower one and they form a vertical balance line. Backbone is even naturally not absolutely straight.

In normal position the backbone does not need extra muscules to hold the posture. If you need lot of muscules to compensate the wrong position of bacbone it will cause tensions and that will turn into pain later.

There should be a  feeling that the body weight stands on two sitting bones and backbone holds the balance.

If you feel comfortable and flexible and at the same time connected with ground through sitting bones your pain should disappear. It is just like this plant - reed.

A lot of help can come through Alexander Technique.

GL
Jaak Sikk

[gsmile]

A lot of help can come through Alexander Technique.

It's all about balance and alignment, which I agree with. Strain will wear you out over time.

[keyboardclass]

Beware those less informed Alexander practitioners who say the head balances on the top of the spine.  It can't, it's front heavy.  There's a big difference between the experience of good posture and the actual physiology.

[nyiregyhazi]

Beware those less informed Alexander practitioners who say the head balances on the top of the spine.  It can't, it's front heavy.  There's a big difference between the experience of good posture and the actual physiology.

It's all very well trying to be pedantic but "balance" does not necessarily mean a state that involves zero effort. A tight rope walker is regarded as being well balanced but nobody would assume that must mean their muscles aren't doing anything. The fact that the head cannot be balanced with literally zero effort is nothing to "beware". It remains a fact that certain alignments require fewer muscular activities to maintain balance.

[keyboardclass]

A tight rope walker is only intermittently in a state of balance - you're referring to the unbalanced phase where the muscles are working hard.  In the case of the head about 2/3rd's of its weight is in front - there's no balancing at all! (i.e. there's nothing to balance as in ' A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces')

[nyiregyhazi]

"A tight rope walker is only intermittently in a state of balance - you're referring to the unbalanced phase where the muscles are working hard."

? Are you implying that the muscles do not work in the balanced phase? When I stand still I am balanced. So is a stationary tighrope walker. Neither of us have the opportunity to remain balanced should we release each and every muscular effort. We would both fall and lose balance. To say that something is "balanced" does not by implication suggest that the muscles are free to become literally inert.

"In the case of the head about 2/3rd's of its weight is in front - there's no balancing at all! (i.e. there's nothing to balance as in ' A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces')"

You are saying that the head never enters equilibrium? For Lang Lang perhaps this is so, but whenever a head is still it is most certainly balanced. If you want to be a pedant, you need to be au fait with accepted use of terminology- especially if you want to bring physics into it. If a head is still, all forces are cancelled and it is indeed balanced.

[keyboardclass]

To say that something is "balanced" does not by implication suggest that the muscles are free to become literally inert.

But it does imply they do less work.  The muscles keeping the head in place are always quite active in an erect posture as they have to counteract the frontal weight of the head .  Call that balanced if you like, I don't.

[nyiregyhazi]

But it does imply they do less work.  The muscles keeping the head in place are always quite active in an erect posture as they have to counteract the frontal weight of the head .  Call that balanced if you like, I don't.

I don't care what your personal definition of "balance" is and I doubt very much whether practioners of Alexander technique do either. Balance is defined by the sentence you posted yourself:

' A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces'

Did you just lift it from wikipedia, without bothering to think what it actually means? Why did you quote it, if you have your own differing "definition" of balance?

The point is that different types of balance require different levels of effort. If the spine bends considerably so the head is not so much on top, the balancing forces required of the neck muscles are larger. If the head sits more "on top" of upper veterbrae, the balancing force required to stop the head "nodding" forwards is smaller. Simple. So, yes, it does imply that the muscles do less work. And simple mechanics verifies the truth of this. It's the same reason why it takes greater force to hold a sword out horizontally than to keep it balanced when almost vertical.
.

[keyboardclass]

The arrangement of head on neck is more of a pulley viz:


Now if you want to call that balancing fine, but who then is the pedantic one?

[nyiregyhazi]

The arrangement of head on neck is more of a pulley viz:


Now if you want to call that balancing fine, but who then is the pedantic one?

You are. You tried to rubbish Alexander technique based on a technicality of language that is not even grounded in accuracy. You're just not a very good pedant. This whole criticism is grounded in your failure to understand that "balance" does not by definition refer to an inert state of inactivity. If it did we'd all be cheating when claiming to stand in "balance" unless we could maintain such a posture while anaesthetised. If it's "pedantic" to debunk your short-sighted criticism and illustrate your failure to accurately understand terminology, so be it.

While your diagram indeed represents balanced forces, I have not the slightest idea what point a diagram of a pulley is supposed to convey.

[nyiregyhazi]

The arrangement of head on neck is more of a pulley viz:


Now if you want to call that balancing fine, but who then is the pedantic one?

Changed the picture? Regardless, if you think the head on the neck is "more of a pulley" you are simply illustrating the extent of your ignorance. It is not in ANY sense a pulley and neither does it behave remotely like one. Try something that moves rotationally around a hinge. If you want to make comparisons, you'd be better off sticking to metaphors about centipedes.

[keyboardclass]

if you think the head on the neck is "more of a pulley" you are simply illustrating the extent of your ignorance. It is not in ANY sense a pulley and neither does it behave remotely like one.

In Your Humble Opinion!  We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[nyiregyhazi]

In Your Humble Opinion!  We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Stop trolling and use your bloody brain! With the pulley everything moves in a continuous direction and the centre of gravity only moves up and down. A head ROTATES around a joint. The more you crane your neck forwards, the larger the force that needs to be balanced, if you are to stop the head going further still. It's all about the centre of gravity. The further it is displaced, the greater the balancing force that is required. If you feel this is in dispute, you need to put aside your delusions of grandeur and study some GCSE science. Your "opinion" about what Alexander technique says is the product of sheer ignorance. The idea that the neck is like a "pulley" is just about the most ignorant comparison I have ever heard.

[keyboardclass]

You obviously have nothing better to do.  I do!

[nyiregyhazi]

You obviously have nothing better to do.  I do!

Nothing better to do than verify my facts? If you're too busy to research some basic background issues before making damning appraisals, you should also consider yourself too busy to be making damning appraisals. It's extremely tiresome to see you trying to portray dismissals that are founded upon casual ignorance as if they stem from intelligent reasoning.

[keypeg]

.

[keyboardclass]

Nothing better to do than verify my facts?

I must have missed that verification!  Do you wanna run that by me again?

[nyiregyhazi]

I must have missed that verification!  Do you wanna run that by me again?

I'm not your science teacher and I am not going to repeat myself simply because you do not understand how a centre of gravity works, or that the mechanics of a skull bear no resemblance to the mechanics of a pulley. If you want to learn enough not to use pig-ignorant schoolboy errors as the basis for trying to rubbish Alexander Technique, I'd advise you to go back to school and study GCSE physics.